OHIO SHOOTER WAS A RADICAL LEFTIST WHO SUPPORTED ELIZABETH WARREN.

While the media has been quick to blame President Trump for the mass shooting in El Paso, they are noticeably quieter about the mass shooter in Ohio, who described him self as a “socialist,” praised Antifa and expressed support for Elizabeth Warren.

Before it was suspended last night, Connor Betts’ Twitter feed made it clear that he was a left-wing fringe extremist. Amongst other things, Betts;

– Described himself as a “leftist”

– Tweeted “I want socialism”.

– Tweeted “Warren I’d happily vote for”.

– Retweeted Bernie Sanders numerous times.

– Retweeted Antifa accounts numerous times.

– Tweeted “kill every fascist”.

– Tweeted “burn the world to the ground to start the new one”.

– Repeatedly tweeted “hail Satan”.

– Expressed praise and sympathy for the Antifa terrorist who attempted to firebomb an ICE facility, calling him a “martyr”.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has supported gun control on many occasions throughout its long history, and they are moving back in that direction if their public statement released today is any indicator.

Earlier in the day, President Donald Trump endorsed “red flag” gun control laws that would deny rights enshrined under the 2nd Amendment to anyone arbitrarily deemed a dangerous individual by the courts.

“We must make sure that those judged to pose a grave risk to public safety do not have access to firearms, and that, if they do, those firearms can be taken through rapid due process,” Trump said, in response to two mass shootings that took place over the weekend.

“That is why I have called for red-flag laws, also known as extreme risk protection orders,” he added.

The NRA’s statement in favor of Trump’s sentiments is a clear endorsement of red flag laws, an issue the organization has tap danced around in recent years.

“Nobody wants dangerous people to have access to firearms which is why the NRA supports risk protection orders that respects the due process of rights and ensures those found mentally ill receive the care they need,” said National Rifle Association’s Catherine Mortensen in January.

Other more consistent firearms freedom groups, such as the Gun Owners of America (GOA) and National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), are firmly in opposition of the capitulation made by President Trump and the NRA on this issue.

“Let me be crystal clear. Forcing universal (background) checks and red-flag gun confiscation laws on Americans would have done nothing to stop either of these murderers. They went through the failed and unconstitutional National Instant Criminal Background Check system,” NAGR President Dudley Brown said.

“We will let our members and supporters know how their elected officials vote – just like we did back in 2013 when they tried to pass gun control during the Obama years,” Brown added.

“These proposals generally begin with the police or an ‘angry ex’ making a telephone call to a judge. And, based on that telephone call, the judge can issue an order stripping you of your Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights,” the GOA wrote in an action alert against red flag laws.

“This is perhaps the most dangerous gun control proposal to come out of Michael Bloomberg’s playbook,” the action alert said.

Because of the work of the NRA and their influence on President Trump, these types of heinously unconstitutional infringements may be the law of the land across the country before long.

President Trump called for Red Flag laws Monday morning during remarks on the Texas and Ohio shootings.

Trump said, “I am directing the Department of Justice to work in partnership with local, state, and federal agencies–as well as social media companies–to develop tools that can detect mass shooters before they strike.” He then referenced the February 14, 2018, Parkland shooter, noting he had sent up many red flags with his behavior prior to the shooting, but no one took action to stop him.

Trump voiced support for “Red Flag laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders.” He explained, “We must make sure that those judged to pose a grave risk to public safety do not have access to firearms and that, if they do, those firearms can be taken through rapid due process.”

On August 4, 2019, Breitbart News reported that Rep. Dan Crenshaw’s (R-TX) also responded to the Texas and Ohio shootings by calling for Red Flag laws. Sen. Lindsey Graham also called for them in a tweet, writing: “Time to do more than pray. Time to enact common-sense legislation in Congress to empower states to deal with those who present a danger to themselves and others — while respecting robust due process.”

Katy Perry’s ‘Dark Horse’ Copied Christian Rapper Flame, Jury Finds.

UPDATE: A jury has found that Katy Perry, her collaborators and her label Capitol Records must pay $2.78 million in damages to Marcus Gray and two of his co-writers for copying elements of the Christian rapper’s 2009 song “Joyful Noise” on Perry’s 2013 song “Dark Horse,” Associated Pressreports. The jury awarded the money on Thursday.

“Dark Horse,” which has sold more than 13 million copies worldwide, credits several songwriters, including Perry and Sarah Hudson, who wrote the lyrics, and rapper Juicy J, who wrote his verse. The track was produced by Dr. Luke, Max Martin and Cirkut, who created the beat in question during the week-long trial. Flame, born Marcus Gray, and Emanuel Lambert and Chike Ojukwuhis, two co-authors on “Joyful Noise,” first sued in 2014, alleging that “Dark Horse” stole the song’s memorable beat. A rep for Perry declined to comment. Reps for Dr. Luke and Juicy J did not reply to requests for comment.

Perry’s lawyers argued that if the “commonplace” beats in question were subject to copyright it could hurt all songwriters and have potential implications for music down the road. “They’re trying to own basic building blocks of music, the alphabet of music that should be available to everyone,” Perry’s lawyer Christine Lepera said during closing arguments of the trial. Lepera did not reply to a request for comment.

Perry, who was not present when the verdict was read, testified that she had never heard “Joyful Noise,” nor heard of Flame, before the lawsuit. Her co-writers testified similarly. Flame’s lawyers responded that the song was widely distributed, with millions of plays on YouTube and Spotify, and reminded the jury of Perry’s origins in the Christian music scene. His team argued that Perry and her team had ripped off the main beat and instrumental line of “Joyful Noise.”

During the trial, Perry even offered to perform “Dark Horse” live when her lawyers were unable to play the song due to a broken speaker system. The issue was eventually fixed, so no impromptu concert was necessary.

Capitol Records, Perry’s label, which distributed the single, was also found liable in the lawsuit verdict. “Dark Horse” appeared on Perry’s fourth album, Prism, released by Capitol on October 18, 2013. The track was nominated for a Grammy nomination and Perry also performed the song during her 2015 Super Bowl halftime show.

The jury will decide this week how much Flame is owed in damages by Perry and the other defendants.

Kentucky has joined several other states in passing legislation requiring schools to display the U.S. national motto “In God We Trust.” Kentucky’s state legislature passed the measure in March, Republican Governor Matt Bevin signed it into law, and with the beginning of this school year students across the state will be greeted by the phrase, thanks to the measure which mandates that “local boards shall require each public elementary and secondary school to display the national motto of the United States, ‘In God We Trust,’ in a prominent location in the school.”

The Lexington Herald Leader newspaper reported that school districts across Kentucky are hard at work placing the motto in prominent spots in school facilities. And while thus far the secular-atheist Freedom From Religion Foundation has been silent on the Kentucky law, that state’s franchise of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sent a letter to the legislature before the measure’s passage insisting that lawmakers “refrain from mandating any religious observation or exercise of religion in our public schools.”

In a public letter ACLU attorneys wrote: “We firmly believe that our legislature should be working to ensure that schools are adequately funded, that teachers are appropriately compensated, and that our students receive the highest quality education possible. To do right by our students, these should be our priorities — not mandating that every school in the Commonwealth display a motto that has the appearance of endorsing religion.”

Up to now, the ACLU has decided that it is not worth diving into a full-blown legal fight with the state against the new law. However, the group invited parents and students “who feel like their rights have been violated or have questions or concerns about the implantation of the ‘In God We Trust’ motto law” to contact the ACLU’s Kentucky office.

According to ChristianHeadlines.com, the recent uptick in legislation requiring schools to prominently display “In God We Trust” was most likely influenced by a study entitled Report and Analysis on Religious Freedom Measures Impacting Prayer and Faith in America. “The report, put together by pro-religious groups, encourages lawmakers that ‘states can and must play a crucial role in protecting religious freedom,’” reported the Christian news site.

As reported previously by The New American, South Dakota passed similar legislation in March, requiring schools in the state to display the motto “In God We Trust.” According to a report by National Public Radio, “within the last couple of years, six Southern states — Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida, Alabama, and Arizona — have approved similar legislation, enforcing or allowing public schools to post the U.S. motto.”

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” states an FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office dated May 30, the news outlet reported Thursday.

The document specifically mentions QAnon, a shadowy network that believes in a deep state conspiracy against President Donald Trump, and Pizzagate, the theory a pedophile ring including Clinton associates was being run out of the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant.

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” the document states.

It also goes on to say the FBI believes conspiracy theory-driven extremists are likely to increase during the 2020 presidential election cycle.

“The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access,” the document says, the news outlet reported.

The FBI is already under fire for its approach to domestic extremism, Yahoo News noted — pointing to a hearing last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee in which FBI Director Christopher Wray faced accusations the bureau was not focusing enough on white supremacist violence.

Wray told the lawmakers the FBI had dispensed with separate categories for black identity extremists and white supremacists, saying the bureau was focusing on “racially motivated” violence, the New York Post noted.

Yahoo News reported the bulletin focused on violence based specifically on beliefs that “attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others” and are “usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”

Besides QAnon and Pizzagate, the FBI document also cites a California man who was arrested Dec. 19, 2018, after being found with what appeared to be bomb-making materials in his vehicle.

The unnamed man was planning to “blow up a satanic temple monument” in the Capitol rotunda in Springfield, Illinois, to “make Americans aware of Pizzagate and the New World Order, who were dismantling society,” according to the document.

Like this:

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks next to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Ajit Pai during an event on United States 5G deployment in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., April 12, 2019.Carlos Barria | Reuters

President Trump announces new 5G initiatives: It’s a race ‘America must win’

President Donald Trump and the FCC on Friday announced several initiatives to spur 5G network growth in the U.S.

“The race to 5G is on and America must win,” Trump said, noting that 92 5G markets will be ready by the end of the year, outpacing South Korea, which is on pace to have 48 markets live by the end of 2019.

“It’s a race our great companies are now involved in,” Trump said. “According to some estimates, the wireless industry plans to invest $275 billion in 5G networks, creating 3 million American jobs quickly, and adding $500 billion to our economy.”

5G is the next generation of wireless network that will enable faster data speeds. Unlike 4G LTE, which mainly targeted mobile phones, tablets and computers, 5G is also expected to enable more reliable connections on self-driving vehicles that will need a constant data connection, and smart cities that use “internet of things” devices, such as connected street lamps, traffic lights and more.

“To accelerate and incentivize these investments, my administration is freeing up as much wireless spectrum as needed,” Trump said. ”[We’re] removing regularity barriers to the buildout of networks.The FCC is taking very bold action, bolder than they’ve ever taken before, to make wireless spectrum available.

Spectrum is the airwaves networks use to provide internet to devices. Spectrum space is regulated by the FCC.

Trump’s comments come in tandem with announcements the FCC made Friday. The FCC said that starting on Dec. 10, it will offer “the largest spectrum auction in our nation’s history,” allow carriers bid on 3,400 MHz of new spectrum in the Upper 37 GHz, 39 GHz and 47 GHz spectrum bands. The additional spectrum would “promote the development of 5G, the Internet of Things and other advanced spectrum-based services,” the FCC said.

Additionally, the FCC proposed new new rules that allow “Fixed Satellite Service operators to provide faster, more advanced services to their customers” using 50 GHz spectrum. It also said that current rules “impair the ability of users to deploy small, next-generation networking devices on their own property,” particularly in rural areas, and proposed changes that would allow people to install “hub and relay antennas” on their property to help spur 5G networks.

“We believe that the security and reliability of 5G is absolutely important, not just as a matter of national competitiveness, but also as a matter of national security,” Pai told CNBC’s Eamon Javers. “I have been very encouraged by my conversations with our European allies all across the Continent about the importance of security and 5G networks. The need to have a framework to understand the risk profile of certain equipment and services is something most allies recognize and it’s just a collaborative process of making sure that we have a framework that works for everybody.”

5G WIRELESS: A RIDICULOUS FRONT FOR GLOBAL CONTROL

One wireless control grid to rule them all

Jon Rappoport | Infowars.com – APRIL 4, 2018

First, two quotes to give a bit of background.

5G speed, for people who must download a whole season of their favorite show in two seconds:

“It’s the next (fifth) generation of cellular technology which promises to greatly enhance the speed, coverage and responsiveness of wireless networks. How fast are we talking about? Think 10 to 100 times speedier than your typical cellular connection, and even faster than anything you can get with a physical fiber-optic cable going into your house. (You’ll be able to download a season’s worth of ‘Stranger Things’ in seconds.)” [CNET.com]

Lunatic 5G installation of small transmitters packed close together every few hundred feet:

“The next big thing in cellular technology, 5G, will bring lightning-fast wireless Internet — and thousands of antenna-topped poles to many neighborhoods where cell towers have long been banned.”

“Wireless companies are asking Congress and state lawmakers to make it easier to install the poles by preempting local zoning laws that often restrict them, particularly near homes. The lobbying efforts have alarmed local officials across the country. They say they need to ensure that their communities do not end up with unsightly poles cluttering sidewalks, roadsides and the edges of front yards.”

“They also are hearing from residents worried about possible long-term health risks. Until now, much of the cell equipment that emits radio-frequency energy has been housed on large towers typically kept hundreds of feet from homes [also harmful to health]. The new ‘small cell’ technology uses far more antennas and transmitters that are smaller and lower-powered, but clustered closer together and lower to the ground.” [The Washington Post]

I keep hammering on this 5G issue, because it contains the blueprint of a future only elite madmen want.

For the rest of us, it’s a catastrophe in the making.

I’ve covered the extreme health dangers of 5G in another article. Here, I want to flesh out the hidden agenda.

A few decades ago, a movement was started to create an interconnected power grid for the whole planet. We were told this would be the only way to avoid wasting huge amounts of electricity and, voila, bring all nations and all people into a modern 21st century.

But now, it’s a different story, a classic bait and switch. The bait was the promise of One Grid for all. The switch is what 5G will bring us:

100 billion or more NEW devices online, all connected to the Internet and the Cloud. What could be more wasteful? What could be more ridiculous? This is the opposite of sane energy use.

Who really cares whether his 5G-connected refrigerator keeps track of the food items inside it and orders new items when the supply dwindles? Who has to have a 5G driverless car that takes him to work? Who must have a 5G stove that senses what is being cooked and sets the temperature for four minutes? Who lives and who dies if a washing machine doesn’t measure how much soap is stored inside and doesn’t order new soap? Who is demanding a hundred devices in his home that spy on him and record his actions?

With 5G, the ultimate goal is: every device in every home that uses energy will be “its own computer,” and the planetary grid will connect ALL these devices to a monitoring and regulating Energy Authority.

As Patrick Wood details in his classic, Technocracy Rising, that worldwide Energy Authority was the dream of the men who launched the Technocracy movement, in America, in the 1930s.

They set out the key requirements—which weren’t technically possible then, but are quite doable now: continuous real-time measuring of both energy production and energy use from one end of the planet to the other…

So that both energy production and energy consumption could be controlled. “For the good of all,” of course.

5G is the technology for making this happen.

“We’re promising a stunning long-range future of ‘automatic homes’, where everything is done for you. But really, that’s the cover story. Ultimately, we want to be able to measure every unit of energy used by every device in every home—and through AI, regulate how much energy we will let every individual consume, moment to moment. We control energy. We are the energy masters. If you want to run and operate and dominate the world, you control its energy.”

The beginning of an actual rational plan for energy would start this way: DUMP 5G. Dump the whole plan of installing small transmitter-cells on buildings and homes and trees and lampposts and fences all over the planet. Forget it. Don’t bring 100 billion new devices online. Aside from the extreme health dangers, it’s ridiculously expensive. It’s on the order of saying we need thousand-foot robots standing on sidewalks washing the windows of office buildings.

If some movie star wants to install 30 generators on his property and have engineers build him an automatic home, where he can sit back, flip a switch, and have three androids carry him into his bathtub and wash him and dry him, fine. But planning a smart city? Who voted for that? Who gave informed consent? Nobody.

A global Energy Authority, of course, is going to decide that a small African country needs to be given much more energy, while Germany or France or the US will have to sacrifice energy for the cause of social justice. But this is yet another con, because you won’t see government cleaning up the contaminated water supplies of that small African country, or installing modern sanitation, or curtailing the forced movement of populations into poverty-stricken cities, or reclaiming vast farm land stolen by mega-corporations and giving that land back to local farmers.

The whole hidden purpose of an Energy Authority is control.

And because the Authority is Globalist and Technocratic, it aims to lower energy use in industrial nations and help wreck their economies, making it much easier to move in and take over those countries.

Having said all this, there are gaps in our knowledge about 5G. For example, who in his right mind would propose a wireless system that relies on many, many, many cells/transmitters placed closely to each other, all over the world?

This system would be far more vulnerable to physical disruption than the present 4G.

You can find many articles that claim the US military must have 5G for their most advanced planes—and for their developing AI-controlled weapons. How does that work? Where will all the transmitter/cells be placed on the ground and in the air?? Something is missing here. Is there another version of 5G we’re not being told about? Is geoengineering of the atmosphere the means for tuning up space so 5G signals can be passed along without cells/transmitters?

Part of the US obsession to bring 5G online quickly stems from competition with China, which at the moment is in the lead on developing and exporting the technology. “If China has it, we have to have it sooner and better.” This attitude sidesteps the issue of why we must have 5G in the first place.

And now there are reports that the US government is considering a plan to build the whole 5G network itself—rather than leaving the job to corporations. Of course, a few favored companies (like Google) would be chosen by the government in a non-bid situation to provide VERY significant help. If such a plan were to launch, we would have a very tight club at the top of the communications and energy pyramid. And that club would maximize 5G to expand already-saturated surveillance of populations.

Amazon’s Ring home security service has entered into contracts with over 200 police departments, giving law enforcement expansive access to the video and audio collected by the service’s surveillance devices.

An e-mail obtained by Motherboard included notes written by the Waynesboro, Virginia, chief of police taken during a webinar he participated in that featured a Ring representative explaining to law-enforcement officers the use of something the Ring spokesman called the “Law Enforcement Neighborhood Portal.”

The chief’s e-mailed notes, according to Motherboard, revealed the personal access Amazon was selling. “This portal allows local police to see a map with the approximate locations of all Ring cameras in a neighborhood, and request footage directly from camera owners. Owners need to consent, but police do not need a warrant to ask for footage,” the article reports.

The last few lines of the e-mail disclose the contact information of a Ring neighborhood’s training manager, who will train client police departments on the use of the “Law Enforcement Portal.”

A visit to Amazon’s Ring Security System’s product page reveals to possible customers — and those worreid about personal privacy — all the data that Amazon is making available — without prior permission or notice of Ring customers — to police departments.

Monitor your property in HD video, and check-in on home at anytime with Live View on-demand video and audio.

Hear and speak to people on your property from your mobile device with the built-in microphone and speakers.

Activate the siren from your phone, tablet and PC to scare away any suspicious people caught on camera.

Perhaps most troubling is the fact that the images and sounds recorded by Ring can be obtained from Ring customers without a warrant. Admittedly, the homeowner would need to give permission to police, but pressure would be there, As millions of Americans are fond of saying, “If you haven’t done anything wrong, you’ve got nothing to hide.” So complying with a request from police for access to their security camera footage would be regarded by many as their civic duty.

There is a central tenet of Anglo-America law that is overlooked by those over-zealous to please the police: A person is innocent until proven guilty.

Advertisements created by Amazon display disregard for this key constitutional principle, too.

In an ad promoting the Ring Community service, Amazon declares:

Ring’s Community Alerts help keep neighborhoods safe by encouraging the community to work directly with local police on active cases. Alerts are created using publicly posted content from the Neighbors app that has a verified police report case number. We get the explicit consent of the Ring customer before the content is posted, and utilize sponsored, geotargeted posts to limit the content to relevant communities. Community members can then directly share or post tips to help local police contact persons of interest or investigate crimes.

As part of this ad, Amazon published footage from a Ring surveillance camera provided by one of its customers. Along with the image of the unnamed woman was the caption, “This woman was caught on video breaking into a vehicle.”

Did you catch the problem with that promo?

Was the woman in video still found guilty of breaking into a car? Was she charged? Was she tried? Was she found guilty by a jury of her peers?

In other words, was she afforded due process, as required for over 800 years by English and American constitutional law?

I imagine some of you are rolling your eyes at my suggestion that Amazon should be more careful before advertising accusations of criminal activity.

Let me offer the following frightening use of user-provided surveillance video footage: Two neighbors are arguing for months over some matter and the disagreement has escalated to a heated exchange of words. Now imagine that one of the neighbors subscribes to Amazon’s Ring security system and he knows that he can give cops access to the images recorded by his Ring surveillance camera. He reviews the footage and finds an image of his neighbor trying to get into a car the neighbor owns, but accidentally locked himself out of. The car is parked on the street between the two houses.

Now, imagine you’re the neighbor trying to get into your own car and you see a picture of yourself on Twitter posted by Amazon carrying the caption: “This woman was caught on video breaking into a vehicle.”

Imagine that the neighbor’s employer sees the ad and decides that he doesn’t want to employ “a criminal.”

This, dear readers, is the reason the Fourth Amendment exists. This is the reason that centuries of Anglo-American legal protections have guaranteed that an accused man is innocent until proven guilty, that he cannot be punished for a crime without being afforded the due process of law.

Finally, should corporations be able to sell police departments access to the names and addresses of people who’ve purchased the corporation’s home security systems?

Should the police be able to bypass the constitutional mandate (and basic human right) that in order to keep people “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,” “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized?”

Consider this statement made by James Otis, in his attack on the Writs of Assistance — unwarranted police intrusions into the homes of Americans that lit the fuse of the War for Independence: “Now, one of the most essential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one’s house. A man’s house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his castle.”

The bottom line is, regardless of Amazon’s sale to police departments of access to home surveillance video, the citizens who use the surveillance system and agree to law-enforcement access to their video footage cannot give the police permission to search or surveil the homes, papers, effects, or anything else of another person. This is a vital principle in the history of America and of the liberty her people should enjoy.